Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.

Apparently, Mexico City was the center of wholesale human sacrifice at the time of the Aztec Empire and the arrival of the Spanish. A massive sacrifice area that the Spanish conquistadors wrote about and for centuries many people claimed the Spanish invented it to badmouth the natives has now been found, giving credibility to what the Spanish wrote of what they found upon arriving at Mexico.

I can only imagine what went through the minds of the Spanish as they first saw these horrific sights. What could they believe these people were worshiping, after coming from a Christian and Catholic society? Devil worshippers? Infidels? A people devoting themselves to the likeness of the devil?

I personally probably would had been horrified and disgusted with such a scenery and my opinion of the Aztec Empire would had been of the most lowly. I can't even watch a video of human beings being killed, of which there are many of such videos in the internet, let alone be able to watch the sacrifice of hundreds of people or even the remains of thousands of sacrificed people.

Quote:

... the Spanish conquistadors who marched into Tenochtitlan in 1519 saw them differently. For them, the skulls—and the entire practice of human sacrifice—evinced the Mexica's barbarism and justified laying waste to the city in 1521. The Spanish tore down the Templo Mayor and the tzompantli in front of it, paved over the ruins, and built what would become Mexico City. And the great rack and towers of skulls passed into the realm of historical mystery.

Quote:

Some conquistadors wrote about the tzompantli and its towers, estimating that the rack alone contained 130,000 skulls. But historians and archaeologists knew the conquistadors were prone to exaggerating the horrors of human sacrifice to demonize the Mexica culture. As the centuries passed, scholars began to wonder whether the tzompantli had ever existed.

Archaeologists at the National Institute of Anthropology and History (INAH) here can now say with certainty that it did. Beginning in 2015, they discovered and excavated the remains of the skull rack and one of the towers underneath a colonial period house on the street that runs behind Mexico City's cathedral. (The other tower, they suspect, lies under the cathedral's back courtyard.) The scale of the rack and tower suggests they held thousands of skulls, testimony to an industry of human sacrifice unlike any other in the world. Now, archaeologists are beginning to study the skulls in detail, hoping to learn more about Mexica rituals and the postmortem treatment of the bodies of the sacrificed. The researchers also wonder who the victims were, where they lived, and what their lives were like before they ended up marked for a brutal death at the Templo Mayor.

Quote:

A codex written after the conquest by a Spanish priest depicts Tenochtitlan's enormous skull rack, or tzompantli. 1587 AZTEC MANUSCRIPT, THE CODEX TOVAR/WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Quote:

Archaeologists have now discovered and excavated the remains of tzompantli.
RAÚL BARRERA RODRÍGUEZ

Yeah, the Aztec way of life revolved around death (even the musical instruments were designed to sound like dying screams). Tenochtitlan may have been a beautiful sight to behold with its tall pyramids surrounded by mountains and water. But it had to be torn down, after countless people were sacrificed against their will, Nobody except the Mexica themselves wanted Tenochtitlan to stand.

Early Indo-European people in Asia also had skull racks. They'd behead their slain enemies, and mount the skulls on stakes in a circle around the war leader, or chief's hut. The Huns did the same. The Huns also made bowls out of the skulls of their dead enemies. Tibetan monks still use skull cups in their religious rituals. Many of the world's peoples had such practices in their pre-histories.

Yeah, the Aztec way of life revolved around death (even the musical instruments were designed to sound like dying screams). Tenochtitlan may have been a beautiful sight to behold with its tall pyramids surrounded by mountains and water. But it had to be torn down, after countless people were sacrificed against their will, Nobody except the Mexica themselves wanted Tenochtitlan to stand.

I disagree. There was no need to demolish any of those structures. When the Turks conquered the Byzantine Empire, they left most of them unharmed and decided to use them instead.

It's a real shame that Tenochtitlan is no longer around as it would have been quite something.

Yeah, the Aztec way of life revolved around death (even the musical instruments were designed to sound like dying screams). Tenochtitlan may have been a beautiful sight to behold with its tall pyramids surrounded by mountains and water. But it had to be torn down, after countless people were sacrificed against their will, Nobody except the Mexica themselves wanted Tenochtitlan to stand.

Many people are not aware that prior to the so-called renaissance in most parts the world, a person did not perceive himself as an individual, the individual was an integral part of a group. The individual worked, lived ,and died without the awareness of being one.

I think that in Mexico, as well as in places, like Persia, Egypt, Peru and most of the Asian continent, a person would be willing without any hesitation to die as part of a group in the name of their King or their God. Why would they be afraid or much less refuse to be sacrificed?

Many people are not aware that prior to the so-called renaissance in most parts the world, a person did not perceive himself as an individual, the individual was an integral part of a group. The individual worked, lived ,and died without the awareness of being one.

I think that in Mexico, as well as in places, like Persia, Egypt, Peru and most of the Asian continent, a person would be willing without any hesitation to die as part of a group in the name of their King or their God. Why would they be afraid or much less refuse to be sacrificed?

It's a bit different though. Many of the sacrifices carried out by the Aztecs were against conquered nations, but not all. In a way, it's similar to an execution, but a lot more gruesome.

The Aztecs were hardly unique in this regard, as many Mesoamerican cultures practiced human sacrifice, but they did so on a larger scale.

As far as I can tell ( though I'm not certain), there was no equivalent in the Old world.

Many people are not aware that prior to the so-called renaissance in most parts the world, a person did not perceive himself as an individual, the individual was an integral part of a group. The individual worked, lived ,and died without the awareness of being one.

Right principle; timing not exactly right.

Christianity caught on because it seems it was the first philosophy that placed value on the individual (parable of the Good Shepard), not to mention human value of women (cf- lofty position of the Holy Mother Mary in the philosophy.)

That philosophy of the individual's value, however, is still struggling in Europe after two millennia of subservience to the Emperors, then The Kings. The Europeans, as opposed to Americans who came here to exert their individuality & desire for self sufficiency, are still ingrained in that mindset of owing everything to the monarch and thus easily tend towards socialistic govt.

We also need to be careful about judging people of the past by today's standards. Someday people will look back at us and may consider us barbarians for not letting our pet dogs eat at the table or have voting rights.

‘In the Southwest, first contact between Native people and Europeans occurred in 1539,’ said Professor Matt Liebmann of Harvard University.

‘We found disease didn’t really start to take effect until after 1620, but we then see a very rapid depopulation from 1620 to 1680. The death rate was staggeringly high – about 87 percent of the Native population died in that short period.

Quote:

In North America, the Native population is estimated to range from two to 18 million during the time Columbus arrived.

Also, lets not forget that it's precisely in Spanish America where most modern native people live and where native blood is more often mixed with the European blood. The parts of this continent that were colonized by the Anglo Saxon peoples is where the least native blood survives.

In Florida, to give on example, the Seminole indians and other tribes lived in peace with the Spaniards during the 300 years of Spanish rule. Once the English/Americans took over Florida, the native population began to plummet.

If we look in the Caribbean, the highest percentages of native genes in peoples DNA is found in the three Spanish isles (Cuba, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico.) In Puerto Rico most of the population actually has native mtDNA. Everywhere else in the Caribbean (English/French/Dutch islands) the native presence in people's DNA is negligible. This is clearly visible in various DNA studies that has been done in the area.

Lastly, let's not forget that germs and viruses were not discovered until the late 18th and 19th centuries. Before then, no one knew how diseases were created or spread. In fact, in many written documents from the 1500's, 1600's, and 1700's people mention areas with 'bad air' to refer to places where certain diseases tended to exist or spread.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease

It's a bit different though. Many of the sacrifices carried out by the Aztecs were against conquered nations, but not all. In a way, it's similar to an execution, but a lot more gruesome.

The Aztecs were hardly unique in this regard, as many Mesoamerican cultures practiced human sacrifice, but they did so on a larger scale.

As far as I can tell ( though I'm not certain), there was no equivalent in the Old world.

They sacrified were more often than not conquered people. A lot of people like to ignore (or are completely ignorant) that the Aztecs was an empire that oppressed countless native societies. The deeply seated resentments on the part of native communities that were oppressed by the Aztecs is what made the Spanish conquest a possibility, because the Spanish made an alliance with various Indian chiefs to beat the Aztecs.

Once the Aztec were beaten, the Spanish government kept its word with the native tribes that were allied. They were exempt from any type of tribute, and many were even admitted into the upper class of the new society that evolved. Many Indian chiefs actually went to Spain to study in universities at the expense of the Spanish government.

Queen Elizabeth did much to guarantee the best treatment for the native peoples, to the point that various laws were passed that basically protected the Indians in Spanish America, and led to the arrest, trial, and jailment of many Spaniards that violated those laws.

These are things that didn't took place in English America until modern times.

Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.